The Two Faces of Pixar
Review by Michael G. Shapiro -
Jul 22, 2008
20 ratings from readers
Many Americans hold a conflicted view of human nature, of whether we are fatally flawed or potentially heroic. Pixar seems to embody this same schizophrenic tendency, changing sides from one movie to the next.
This article contains plot spoilers
of Wall-E and several earlier Pixar films.
The recently-released Wall-E
has everything we’ve come to expect from a Pixar film —
imaginative characters, stunningly rendered visuals, and an adept
blend of humor and genuinely touching sentiment.
Yet its promising surface story —
the bond between two robots from different sides of the galactic
tracks — turns out to be a lure for the film’s deeper and overly
political agenda: criticizing technology and evangelizing Al
Gore-style environmentalist ethics.
In Wall-E, humanity has
wrecked Earth in an orgy of consumeristic excess, spearheaded by the
uber-corporation slash semi-government, Buy ‘n’ Large. Relegated
to a multi-generational vacation on a giant space hotel, humans have
been infantilized by their reliance on technology.
The analogy is drawn through
visually in the baby-like shapes to which humans have devolved.
Humans are out of touch with reality, and reduced to passive
receptacles of entertainment, courtesy of their fawning robot
caretakers.
When it’s discovered that Earth’s
wasteland has sufficiently recovered — after 700 years — to allow
for a single green sprout to emerge, the space hotel’s nominal
captain decides it’s time for humanity to pick up their
long-discarded responsibility, return home, and start farming.
At the finale of the movie, the
bloated, atrophied humans wobble out of their star-hotel into a
hostile wasteland, gleefully anticipating years of hard labor —
tilling the soil.
A song from Peter Gabriel carries us through the
end titles, lamenting that “we messed up our homeland” and
inviting us to “come down to earth.”
This is about as complete an
allegory as one could imagine for an environmentalist revolution,
wherein an out-of-touch and careless mankind redeems itself by
embracing its duty to service mother Earth.
The message is crystal-clear:
Consumerism — read: capitalism — equals tacky excess. Technology
turns mankind into passive, petty amoebas. Through farming comes
happiness.

Were it not for the same signature
visual style and top-shelf storytelling, we might wonder if this film
came from a completely different production company than uplifting
movies like Ratatouille and The Incredibles.
Both movies featured protagonists
defined by heroic talents and villains who were mediocrities fueled
by jealousy. The Incredibles championed individualism with
startling explicitness, ridiculing the you’re-okay-I’m-okay
mantras of today’s public schools.
Ratatouille voiced the
seemingly populist mantra of “everybody can cook” — yet then
elaborated that not everyone could be a fantastic chef, but rather
that a fantastic chef could arise from seemingly modest origins —
e.g., a colony of rats.
Both films made it clear that talent
will find its way to the top in the long run, regardless of conflicts
along the way. More importantly, both films offered an implicit
endorsement of technology and humankind’s prerogative to enjoy
life.
The eponymous Incredibles protected
human society, while
Ratatouille glorified the Paris skyline
and taking pleasure in fine dining — the message in both cases
being that it’s a good thing to build cities and enjoy the fruits
of one’s labors.
Wall-E, by contrast, seems to
stand alongside Cars in its cynicism about humankind and
condemnation of industrial progress.
Cars’ protagonist
Lightning McQueen is vain and condescending, and the historical
expansion of the US highway system is portrayed as a greedy onslaught
which impoverished the little guy.
McQueen’s redemption comes from
getting off his high horse and breaking bread with small-town folks.
Wall-E is even harsher in
condemning technology, showing Earth strewn with mountains of
garbage, and portraying humanity reduced to helpless vapidity.
The surface storyline is simple and
sentimental — robot gets girl robot — but the real character arc
comes from the film’s coddled humans, who vow to ditch their
comforts and embrace their duties as resuscitators of the devastated
mother planet.

On the basis of these four movies,
there seem to be two schools of thought at Pixar about the human
condition. In one, we’re told that humans are heroes who thrive
from self-actualization. In the other, we’re portrayed as thralls
to consumerism who could use a good dose of humility.
If such contradictory perspectives
seem hard to imagine within one production company, just remember
that it mirrors the conflict within many contemporary Americans, who
delight in today’s whirlwind of technological advances — and yet
pang with guilt over exhaling carbon dioxide.
Both Ratatouille and The
Incredibles were helmed by writer-director Brad Bird, who in 1999
brought us the similarly-flavored The Iron Giant. It’s
likely that the all-positive outlook of these films stems from his
authorship.
Audiences, for their part, seem
equally enthusiastic about both schools of Pixar offerings. Time
will tell which storytelling camp makes a bigger cultural mark.
Michael G. Shapiro lives in Los Angeles, where he writes music for film, video games, and
television. Samples of his work can be found on his web site, www.mikemusic.com. He has spoken on orchestral music and epistemology at The Atlas Society's summer seminar. He thinks Mr. Incredible
could easily beat up Eva.